Dec. 31, 1874] 



NATURE 



163 



and many other replies too long to quote, the corre- 

 spondents carefully couple two or more branches of study 

 together in their recommendations. Very few complain 

 that their education was too general and desultory, and 

 one of these adds that it nevertheless " gave wide in- 

 terest." It is worthy of notice that a large proportion of 

 those who praise their education were brought up in 

 Scotland. 



The conclusions which Mr. Gallon adopts as to the 

 best course of education according to the opinion of his 

 correspondents are as follows : — '' To teach a few con- 

 genial and useful things very thoroughly, to encourage 

 curiosity concerning as wide a range of subjects as pos- 

 sible, and not to over-teach." This nearly coincides with 

 the saying attributed to De Morgan, that a good edu- 

 cation consists in teaching " everything of something, 

 and something of everything," But when Mr. oalton 

 describes the best curriculum as compounded of mathe- 

 matics, logic, observation, theory and experiment in at 

 least one branch of science, accurate drawing, and me- 

 chanical manipulation, he seems to underrate the degree 

 in which the study of modern languages was advocated. 

 Mr. Galton would leave these languages to be picked up 

 in the vacation " in the easiest and swiftest manner, with 

 the sole object of enabling the learners to read ordinary 

 books in them." There are, I think, very few boys who 

 would learn any but their native tongue in this way. 

 Most people will hold that languages should be substi- 

 tuted for mechanical manipulation in the school course, 

 and that a boy may safely be left to teach himself carpen- 

 tering, or other mechanical pursuits, if he only be supplied 

 with a good set of tools. 



It is of course impossible adequately to notice, in the 

 limits of an article, the contents of a book which is far 

 more interesting in its details than in its general conclu- 

 sions. I should have liked to discuss Mr. Galton's inves- 

 tigation of the "origin of taste for science" in his corre- 

 spondents. We find that a considerable preponderance 

 of men believe that they had an innate taste or tendency 

 towards science. No less than fifty-nine of them make 

 distinct statements to this effect. In other cases, fortu. 

 nate accidents, opportunities, professional influences, 

 encouragement at home, the influence of teachers or 

 friends, are mentioned as the determining or contributing 

 causes. The reader who carefully studies the interesting 

 answers elicited by Mr. Galton will probably agree with him 

 that they are reliable as far as they go, but it is impossible 

 to suppose that they allow of a real analysis of the causes 

 of scientific taste and zeal. As Mr. Galton remarks, the 

 fortunate accidents referred to by some correspondents 

 will generally indicate the previous existence of a ten- 

 dency, for similar accidents are continually happening to 

 thousands of other persons without any similar effects. 

 Are there not multitudes, again, encouraged by their 

 parents, friends, or teachers, incited by the prospect of 

 pecuniary advantage, or otherwise influenced towards 

 science, who nevertheless do not yield, or, if yielding, 

 never attain great success ? A further great difficulty 

 consists in distinguishing between the origin of great 

 general ability and the circumstances which throw that 

 ability into a particular groove of study. One corre- 

 spondent says that his taste for botany is not innate, 

 " I trace the origin of my botanical tastes to leisure ; to 



the accidental receipt of De CandoUe's 'Flore franqaise' 

 whilst resident in that country ; and to encouragement 

 from my mother." These accidental circumstances may 

 have bent the twig, but was there not a vigorous here- 

 ditary power of growth which enabled that twig to develop 

 itself? 



In some cases it may well be doubted whether a corre- 

 spondent has not mistaken the effect of imitation and 

 friendly encouragement for innate tendency. One geolo- 

 gist writes as follows : — " Decidedly innate as regards 

 coins and fossils. My father and an aunt collected coins 

 and geological specimens, and I have both coins and 

 specimens which have been in my possession since 1 was 

 nine years old." He apparently thinks that the love of 

 fossils and coins was an hereditary instinct, wkich would 

 be a truly remarkable instance of heredity. But is it not 

 much more likely that the instinct was that collecting in- 

 stinct so strongly manifested among the youth of the present 

 day as regards postage-stamps, and which seems to be a 

 kind of abnormal development of the love of property 

 which has been growing in the human race for several 

 thousands of years? The passion for collecting often 

 leads to the study of the objects collected, as is testified 

 by several correspondents ; and in this particular case 

 there must have been a further influence in the examples 

 of the father and aunt. 



An objection which may be in some degree urged 

 against Mr. Galton's results is the insufficient number of 

 instances which can be adduced in any one branch of 

 science. Granting that one hundred cases is enough for 

 the drawing of an average, we must yet remember that 

 the hundred include men of such diffeient pursuits as 

 abstract mathematicians, naturalists, botanists, practical 

 chemists, statisticians. The kind of intellectual power 

 which makes a man eminent in one branch may be very 

 different from what is most conducive to eminence in 

 another branch. Mathematical power is probably much 

 more a gift of nature than interest in statistics. In treat- 

 ing the origin of taste for science Mr. Galton does classify 

 his correspondents according to the branches of science 

 recognised in the sections of the British Association, but 

 in regard to education he makes no such division. Now, 

 if the division be made, the instances in most of the 

 branches become too few ta give a satisfactory average ; 

 whereas if the division be not made, it may be objected 

 that we are averaging results which are not drawn from a 

 uniform basis. The correspondents who supplied answers 

 capable of being utilised aid not much exceed one hundred, 

 which is really too small a number when spread over nine 

 different regions of science. The body of scientific men 

 can hardly be considered so homogeneous as would be 

 an equal number of artists, or musicians, or engineers, or 

 bankers of eminence. 



The interest and value of Mr. Galton's results would 

 have been much greater had we similar results concerning 

 other groups of men to compare with them. The inquiry 

 ought, in fact, to have been conducted on the differential 

 method, and directed to disclose the peculiarities of scien- 

 tific men as contrasted with men in general, or with widely 

 dilferent groups. The labour of the inquiry must have 

 been great as it is, and it may seem a heartless thing to 

 say that Mr. Galton should have made it many times 

 greater. B.;t there would have been many advantages in 



